![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 125. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 3, 2005, at 19:26:19
Please could the small boards be non-googleable and the posts only viewable to members?
It would help me feel a lot safer with stuff that I post to the boards. I did know that stuff was googleable but never made the leap to MY posts are googleable. I'm going to be more careful with what I post from this point on - but would appreciate someplace that is a bit safer so I can forget about it (like I have been - eep!)
Posted by Glydin on July 4, 2005, at 8:21:42
In reply to small boards and privacy, posted by alexandra_k on July 3, 2005, at 19:26:19
I'm just curious as to what is meant by small boards? I thought it was ALL Psycho Babble with categories as to subject matters to make it more specific, and it was all public being able to be read by anyone with internet access and posted to by registering. Am I confused?
I'm wondering about what is being asked.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 4, 2005, at 19:01:47
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Glydin on July 4, 2005, at 8:21:42
Ok. I shall have a go at answering your question. If anyone else has anything to add - then please pipe up, ok?
The current boards require registration to post and the posts are googleable.
There has been some discussion about setting up small boards where a limited number of posters can sign up to them. It will be on a first come first served basis. The notion is that there are an awful lot of Babblers and some of the boards can seem a little overwhelming. Some posters would feel more comfortable posting to a board where there aren't so very many different posters.
There has been some discussion around whether it would be better if these small boards were publicly viewable (even though only members can post to them) or whether it would be better to not have them viewable to non-members. The usual civility rules would apply.
I just think it would feel safer for the posters if their posts were only viewable to members. It would also stop people reading and attempting to post and then finding out they are unable to post to the board.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 4, 2005, at 19:35:17
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Glydin, posted by alexandra_k on July 4, 2005, at 19:01:47
Oh, and the present boards would just continue on unchanged of course.
Posted by Glydin on July 4, 2005, at 20:30:25
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by alexandra_k on July 4, 2005, at 19:35:17
Thanks, I think I got it now. I thought you were referring to boards currently in use...... Thus my confusion.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2005, at 22:01:53
In reply to small boards and privacy, posted by alexandra_k on July 3, 2005, at 19:26:19
> Please could the small boards be non-googleable and the posts only viewable to members?
There does seem to be interest in that. Members could still copy posts?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 4, 2005, at 22:11:03
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2005, at 22:01:53
>Members could still copy posts?
I hadn't really thought about that.
It is useful to be able to get the post you are responding to in your posting box so you can work through it in writing your response.
It is useful to be able to copy and paste peoples post into word if you are working through responding to a few different posts at the same time.So long as people don't go posting it somewhere else.
How about making a rule that you aren't supposed to post other peoples posts on the internet / main boards. The same way we aren't supposed to post Babblemails / emails that have been sent to us.
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 5, 2005, at 23:45:15
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 4, 2005, at 22:11:03
> How about making a rule that you aren't supposed to post other peoples posts on the internet / main boards.
What about emailing them to others?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 6, 2005, at 0:02:56
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 5, 2005, at 23:45:15
> > How about making a rule that you aren't supposed to post other peoples posts on the internet / main boards.
> What about emailing them to others?
Well, I guess that would be a pain in the *ss to try and enforce. How about just asking people to not do that?
Posted by alexandra_k on July 6, 2005, at 0:30:22
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 6, 2005, at 0:02:56
Are you trying to get at the point that privacy really is only an illusion?
It is hard to strike the balance between appropriate degree of caution and outright paranoia...
Posted by alexandra_k on July 6, 2005, at 2:51:16
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 6, 2005, at 0:02:56
> What about emailing them to others?
Actually, what is the situation with respect to people fowarding Babblemails / emails intended for them on to other posters via Babblemail / email?
Since you brought it up...
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 7, 2005, at 8:34:50
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 6, 2005, at 0:02:56
> > > How about making a rule that you aren't supposed to post other peoples posts on the internet / main boards.
>
> > What about emailing them to others?
>
> Well, I guess that would be a pain in the *ss to try and enforce. How about just asking people to not do that?There wouldn't be any way to prevent it, so I think the only option would be to ask people not to -- and to do something if I find out they have. Like with abusing babblemail.
> Are you trying to get at the point that privacy really is only an illusion?
I wouldn't say "only" an illusion, but I do think it's possible to think something's more private than it really is...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 7, 2005, at 8:48:20
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2005, at 22:01:53
> > Please could the small boards be non-googleable and the posts only viewable to members?
> There does seem to be interest in that.Yeah. So how about it?
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 0:10:49
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 7, 2005, at 8:48:20
> Yeah. So how about it?
I think it would be an interesting experiment. But how about making it a separate experiment?
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 10:59:41
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 0:10:49
How about running both at the same time?
Some small boards could be googleable and viewable to non-members, while others wouldn't have to be. People could sign up to whichever they prefer.
Posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 23:03:35
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 8, 2005, at 0:10:49
Or, how about running this experiment first?
How come you don't want to do it that way? Given what people have said about feeling safer and not creating so much of an 'outside looking in' effect?
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 0:44:49
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by alexandra_k on July 8, 2005, at 23:03:35
> How come you don't want to do it that way? Given what people have said about feeling safer and not creating so much of an 'outside looking in' effect?
Part of it is that people can benefit just from reading posts. So those people would miss out.
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 9, 2005, at 3:55:24
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 0:44:49
> people can benefit just from reading posts. So those people would miss out.
That is true. But then people can benefit from posting posts. And those people miss out.
And so people miss out on posting because that is built into the very notion of having boards with a restricted number of posters posting to them. But IMO the effects of that are moderated a great deal by the point that posters can continue to join up to all the other Babble boards (except 2000).
And with respect to the benefit people may get from reading them - they can continue to read all the other Babble boards (even 2000).
I guess I think that the issue of reducing the 'outside looking in' effect is quite important. It goes back to the point that there are more or less 'polite' ways of going about small boards.
And I do find the idea of a little more privacy appealing.
But I guess this has been said before...
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 11:52:55
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 9, 2005, at 3:55:24
> And so people miss out on posting because that is built into the very notion of having boards with a restricted number of posters posting to them.
They wouldn't be able to post on smaller boards that were full, but there would always be other smaller boards...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 10, 2005, at 9:48:43
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 11:52:55
> They wouldn't be able to post on smaller boards that were full, but there would always be other smaller boards...
Right.
So it is about weighing the benefits people may get from reading (but not being able to post) to a particular board versus the benefits people may get from knowing their posts aren't viewable to non-posters and aren't googleable.
It isn't like people miss out on the benefits of reading altogether... There still are the other boards.
How about making them generally viewable when there are membership openings (so people can read the posts when deciding whether to join up). Then, when the limit of members is reached letting the group decide whether they want the board to be generally viewable or not?
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2005, at 8:05:57
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 10, 2005, at 9:48:43
> How about making them generally viewable when there are membership openings (so people can read the posts when deciding whether to join up). Then, when the limit of members is reached letting the group decide whether they want the board to be generally viewable or not?
That would be a compromise, but it's not just people thinking about joining up that may benefit from reading...
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on July 11, 2005, at 8:19:43
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2005, at 8:05:57
> but it's not just people thinking about joining up that may benefit from reading...
Well... To rearrange what you said slightly:
They wouldn't be able to read the smaller boards that were full, but there would always be other smaller boards...
Ok. I give up. Who else may benefit from reading?
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2005, at 11:27:37
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on July 11, 2005, at 8:19:43
> Ok. I give up. Who else may benefit from reading?
Sorry if this is frustrating! People are sometimes interested in the topics that are discussed, or in the people discussing them, but not (at that time, anyway) in contributing to the discussion.
Bob
Posted by Dinah on July 11, 2005, at 18:41:05
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 9, 2005, at 11:52:55
Your trouble, Dr. Bob, is that you think groups of people and types of conversations are interchangeable.
People actually do want to respond to particular people or particular threads you know, once they read them and are engaged by *them*. Not by the idea of being able to chat, but by particular conversations.
Saying "there's another board over there" is not the same as saying this washing machine is in use, but there's another one on the next row.
People are not like washing machines. Conversations are not like washing machines.
It's come up in therapy, you know. When I wanted a fill in therapist for my therapist's absence. And we entered into long discussion ending in the conclusion that therapists are not like washing machines. A conclusion that works against both of us, actually.
There's no way I can get you to understand this concept. I understand that, and I'm sorry for it on many levels. But I thought I'd point it out.
Posted by Dinah on July 11, 2005, at 18:44:28
In reply to Re: small boards and privacy, posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2005, at 11:27:37
P.S.
If boards are interchangeable, why am I wed to Babble? There are other boards out there.
But I love Babble, not other boards. I chose to post on Babble, not on other boards. I would not have been at all happy to hear that Babble was closed, but there were these other wonderful boards out there. It was here that Noa and Mair and KrazyKat and Sar and.... were posting.
Boards are not like washing machines either.
And as frustrating as they may be, neither are board administrators. (twinkly smile)
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.